I understand the notion that corporations are amoral entities that exist solely to profit and as such are immune to moral judgments, but I don't think an employ

I understand the notion that corporations are amoral entities that exist solely to profit and as such are immune to moral judgments, but I don't think an employee should ignore the final product of the company where he or she is employed and what sort of impact that product has on the world as a whole. A company can certainly sell products with significant negative repercussions that probably outweigh any positive contributions; the tobacco industry comes to mind as an obvious example. This is probably also true for founders as well (I won't say it is, I've never been one). I don't really think too many people are sitting around thinking, "I'm going to start a company that screws a lot of people over but gets me rich!" As an employee, it would bother me if I believed that the company that employed me actively harmed the world as a whole; wouldn't that hold true for founders and their new companies as well? (of course there's a spectrum here--not every company that isn't harming the world is contributing to it in any way)